On Monday 13 October 2008, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 10:42:21 -0700
>
> Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It seems to me that this is an EAPI=0 change. Since EAPI=1 and
> > EAPI=2 are just differences to EAPI=0, they wouldn't be voted on.
> > Since EAPI=0 isn't actua
On Thursday 16 October 2008 23:54:32 Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> I'm not sure whether this would work, but one idea would be to handle
> dependencies depending on what's in IUSE of the ebuild inheriting.
That would require ebuilds to set IUSE before inheriting the eclass.
--
Bo Andresen
signature
This is your friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically the 2nd & 4th
Thursdays at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
irc.freenode.net) !
If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even vote
on, let us know! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole Gen
On 11:35 Thu 16 Oct , Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > While the rule of thumb has been if an eclass needs something it should
> > provide it's own depends. However the virtualx eclass needs to be
> > different simply because in some cases it's only uses for tests (this is
> >
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 10:01:40PM +0100, Steve Long wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 20:28:43 +0100
> > Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Fernando J. Pereda wrote:
> >> > A big gain in the context of ebuilds and source packages. Well done.
> >> >
> >> Yes, almost a
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 22:06:40 +0100
Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Have a look at, for example, [1], where Mike already gave you an
> > answer one of the previous times we discussed it.
> >
> I'm aware of the prior discussion.
> Re-read it, and tell me what it breaks, if you can.
Well, w
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 22:01:40 +0100 Ranjit Singh wrote:
> > If you really think that EAPI as an extension has anything to do
> > with performance
>
> You mentioned performance a few times in that lovely thread when it
> got shot down, I believe in the context of metadata generation:
>
> "Performan
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Steve Long wrote:
>> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> > Markus Meier wrote:
>> >> server16
>> >
>> > Already been discussed, can't be done.
>> >
>> What does it break?
>
> Have a look at, for example, [1], where Mike already gave you an
> answer one of th
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 20:28:43 +0100
> Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Fernando J. Pereda wrote:
>> > A big gain in the context of ebuilds and source packages. Well done.
>> >
>> Yes, almost as important as not sourcing any ebuilds, so let's all
>> stick an EAPI ext
Peter Volkov wrote:
> Steve, your example only tests how much time bash takes to parse string.
> It's obvious that in quoted strings some expansions could be avoided and
> thus bash works faster.
Yeah that's all I wanted to get across.
> But although ebuilds use bash syntax they are
> interprete
Arun Raghavan wrote:
> I've not really got an opinion on the topic, per se, but fwiw, this is
> really not a meaningful statistic. *If* parsing strings in the ebuild is
> not a trivial part of the overall ebuild parsing process, then yes, this
> is a significant gain and should be treated as such.
Doug Goldstein wrote:
> While the rule of thumb has been if an eclass needs something it should
> provide it's own depends. However the virtualx eclass needs to be
> different simply because in some cases it's only uses for tests (this is
> it's most common usage in the whole) tree. When it's used
Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
>
>> Doug Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>> It'd be a lot more consistent if ebuilds provided a USE flag or directly
>>> depended on the xorg-server and then used the functions in the eclass.
>>> So in summary, tho
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> Doug Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>> It'd be a lot more consistent if ebuilds provided a USE flag or directly
>> depended on the xorg-server and then used the functions in the eclass.
>> So in summary, those are the changes I plan on making very sh
Doug Goldstein wrote:
> While the rule of thumb has been if an eclass needs something it should
> provide it's own depends. However the virtualx eclass needs to be
> different simply because in some cases it's only uses for tests (this is
> it's most common usage in the whole) tree. When it's used
Doug Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It'd be a lot more consistent if ebuilds provided a USE flag or directly
> depended on the xorg-server and then used the functions in the eclass.
> So in summary, those are the changes I plan on making very shortly. If
> someone's got some input, please
While the rule of thumb has been if an eclass needs something it should
provide it's own depends. However the virtualx eclass needs to be
different simply because in some cases it's only uses for tests (this is
it's most common usage in the whole) tree. When it's used for tests
pulling in the xorg-
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 06:17:12PM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 10:59:39 +0200
> Jose Luis Rivero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > EAPI-2 to EAPI-0 could imply lot of changes (not talking about what is
> > going to happen when we release new and more feature rich EAPIs), and
>
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 09:27:29AM +0200, Duft Markus wrote:
> > Now some package of mine in a local overlay requires bison and flex.
> > It's quite hard to get those to build _and_ work on winnt, so I
> though
> > about splitting the bison ebuilds in dev-util/bison and
> > dev-libs/bison-runt
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 09:27:29AM +0200, Duft Markus wrote:
> Now some package of mine in a local overlay requires bison and flex.
> It's quite hard to get those to build _and_ work on winnt, so I though
> about splitting the bison ebuilds in dev-util/bison and
> dev-libs/bison-runtime (and the sa
On 16-10-2008 09:27:29 +0200, Duft Markus wrote:
> Now some package of mine in a local overlay requires bison and flex.
> It's quite hard to get those to build _and_ work on winnt, so I though
> about splitting the bison ebuilds in dev-util/bison and
> dev-libs/bison-runtime (and the same for flex)
Hi there!
I'm working on a "cross" compilation to native windows from an Interix
Gentoo Prefix, using the normal Prefix portage tree. My setup is nearly
the same as when really cross compiling, except that I can execute what
I compile.
I use command line utilities (DEPEND atoms) from Interix, and
22 matches
Mail list logo
